Shi v. Holder (unpub)
**Credibility**
The agency concluded Shi was not credible because her asylum application stated that she had a trial pending against her, whereas she testified that there was no court trial pending against her. This conclusion is not supported by substantial evidence because Shi’s explanation established there was no inconsistency between her asylum application and testimony. In addition, the inconsistency in Shi’s testimony regarding the Zhong Gong headquarters is a minor inconsistency that does not go to the heart of her claim, and the omissions from her asylum declaration that police used verbal profanities and their “fingers” during her second arrest are omissions of detail. The agency’s finding that Shi gave varying accounts as to how she obtained her passport is not supported by the record.
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2010/07/29/07-72711.pdf
newimmigrationcases
